Thank god for epic exclusives and that they are actually exclusives

[sonofliber]

I mean can you guys believe if they weren't exclusive but just anti steam payments? can you imagine if all this "exclusivity" and "18% cut" was all a lie and they were just doing anti steam payments?.....

Oh wait:


https://www.pcgamer.com/quite-a-few-epic-store-exclusives-are-surprisingly-coming-to-the-microsoft-store/


Yup metro is out on the mc store, Operencia is also out, outer world and Phoenix Point are also gonna be out on the mc store.

So much for the "1 year exclusive" or "epic exclusive", they pay millions just to remove the game from steam only

 

[Erttheking]

I think their goal is less Epic exclusive and more fuck Steam.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

Considering that their stated goal is to break Steam's hegemony over digital sales of games, are we surprised? Also, who actually uses the MC store if there's any other option for digital storefront?

More likely, any deal with Microsoft about digital distribution on Xbox probably also means that the game gets distributed via MC store (as Microsoft are aligning to make them the same) and no developer or publisher in their right mind will sign a deal that effectively removes them from the Xbox, no matter how many millions Epic coughs up. So Epic is going after their main competitors on PC, which means Steam and GoG, and is letting the mc store slide because it is bad, people hate it and they couldn't get developers to opt out of Xbox distribution even if they tried.

 

[Squilookle]

Couldn't care less, to be honest. Steam's perch ought to be rattled.

 

[Mcgeezaks]

Couldn't care less, to be honest. Steam's perch ought to be rattled.

If only they could do it in a proper way

OT: I'd much rather buy games from the Microsoft store than support Epics shady deals.

 

[Kyrian007]

Couldn't care less, to be honest. Steam's perch ought to be rattled.

If only they could do it in a proper way

OT: I'd much rather buy games from the Microsoft store than support Epics shady deals.

I don't really expect ethical behavior from any corporation; Steam, Microsoft, or Epic. As a consumer I'll just leverage each for the best deal I can get, its not like I owe any of them anything. If Epic wants to be "shady" to get some business away from Steam... great. It means better deals for me. If Steam goes even lower to retaliate... even better deals, awesome. Frankly, if they are nickel and diming each other they may spend less time trying to nickel and dime US like publishers do. I would love an environment where Bethesda and EA were releasing a game on the same day and kept lowering prices or adding features to compete with one another.

 

[Mcgeezaks]

Couldn't care less, to be honest. Steam's perch ought to be rattled.

If only they could do it in a proper way

OT: I'd much rather buy games from the Microsoft store than support Epics shady deals.

I don't really expect ethical behavior from any corporation; Steam, Microsoft, or Epic. As a consumer I'll just leverage each for the best deal I can get, its not like I owe any of them anything. If Epic wants to be "shady" to get some business away from Steam... great. It means better deals for me. If Steam goes even lower to retaliate... even better deals, awesome. Frankly, if they are nickel and diming each other they may spend less time trying to nickel and dime US like publishers do. I would love an environment where Bethesda and EA were releasing a game on the same day and kept lowering prices or adding features to compete with one another.

How exactly are we getting a better deal by having Epic bribing publishers to not put their games on steam? All they're doing is forcing people to buy games on a far inferior platform and that's it.

 

[Lufia Erim]

So can someone explain why, every PC gamer and their Cat is up in arms about the Epic store,but Steam themselves don't seem to care?

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

How exactly are we getting a better deal by having Epic bribing publishers to not put their games on steam? All they're doing is forcing people to buy games on a far inferior platform and that's it.

By establishing themselves as actual competition they will force Steam to increase customer satisfaction in order to retain sales that might otherwise end up with Epic. We are not quit there yet, as Epic is still in the phase were they must establish their claim of being a competitor (hence all the exclusive deals, to bring customers in), but give it a year or two at this rate and Steam will have to change or see their monopoly going to Epic. When Steam starts reacting, customers start winning.

 

[Mcgeezaks]

How exactly are we getting a better deal by having Epic bribing publishers to not put their games on steam? All they're doing is forcing people to buy games on a far inferior platform and that's it.

By establishing themselves as actual competition they will force Steam to increase customer satisfaction in order to retain sales that might otherwise end up with Epic. We are not quit there yet, as Epic is still in the phase were they must establish their claim of being a competitor (hence all the exclusive deals, to bring customers in), but give it a year or two at this rate and Steam will have to change or see their monopoly going to Epic. When Steam starts reacting, customers start winning.

I do wonder when they will establish themselves as actual competition, bribing publishers to not put their games on Steam for a X amount of time is not competing, this won't bring more concurrent users to their platform. Just how will they retain sales from customer satisfaction if Epic is literally just buying exclusive deals? It's not like people are going to start using the Epic launcher instead of Steam, Valve already has the vastly superior platform that everyone would much rather use if they got to choose, Epic knows this and it's why all they can do is give bribes. It's not even why they're doing it if we can even believe anything they say at this point, they've said they're doing this because they want Steam to take less cuts from publishers/developers. Even if Valve caves in and gives a bigger cut to publishers/developers, we as customers won't benefit from it and we'd have to deal with this exclusive BS for years for no benefit of our own.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Couldn't care less, to be honest. Steam's perch ought to be rattled.

Let's just be clear here: You're indirectly supporting a platform that forces people to buy games one at a time, and has banned people for too many transactions. Whatever your beef with Steam is, this kind of ineptitude needs to be acknowledged.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

How exactly are we getting a better deal by having Epic bribing publishers to not put their games on steam? All they're doing is forcing people to buy games on a far inferior platform and that's it.

By establishing themselves as actual competition they will force Steam to increase customer satisfaction in order to retain sales that might otherwise end up with Epic. We are not quit there yet, as Epic is still in the phase were they must establish their claim of being a competitor (hence all the exclusive deals, to bring customers in), but give it a year or two at this rate and Steam will have to change or see their monopoly going to Epic. When Steam starts reacting, customers start winning.

Before I respond with I think what you're saying, I just want to make sure I understand you.

Are you saying that Epic's dealings right now are making them actual competition? Or are you saying that the concept of Epic games becoming actual competition is a good thing? That first sentence is what's throwing me off.

 

[meiam]

How exactly are we getting a better deal by having Epic bribing publishers to not put their games on steam? All they're doing is forcing people to buy games on a far inferior platform and that's it.

By establishing themselves as actual competition they will force Steam to increase customer satisfaction in order to retain sales that might otherwise end up with Epic. We are not quit there yet, as Epic is still in the phase were they must establish their claim of being a competitor (hence all the exclusive deals, to bring customers in), but give it a year or two at this rate and Steam will have to change or see their monopoly going to Epic. When Steam starts reacting, customers start winning.

How? Every single customer complain you could level against steam epic as the same problem, and then many more. The only one you could kinda do is that the epic store has less crap release on it, but that's not really a problem.

 

[Saelune]

The people who support Epic on this are essentially saying 'The ends justify the means', except I don't think the ends will justify the means. I think what we will end up with is a shittier experience all around.

 

[sonofliber]

How exactly are we getting a better deal by having Epic bribing publishers to not put their games on steam? All they're doing is forcing people to buy games on a far inferior platform and that's it.

By establishing themselves as actual competition they will force Steam to increase customer satisfaction in order to retain sales that might otherwise end up with Epic. We are not quit there yet, as Epic is still in the phase were they must establish their claim of being a competitor (hence all the exclusive deals, to bring customers in), but give it a year or two at this rate and Steam will have to change or see their monopoly going to Epic. When Steam starts reacting, customers start winning.

I do wonder when they will establish themselves as actual competition, bribing publishers to not put their games on Steam for a X amount of time is not competing, this won't bring more concurrent users to their platform. Just how will they retain sales from customer satisfaction if Epic is literally just buying exclusive deals? It's not like people are going to start using the Epic launcher instead of Steam, Valve already has the vastly superior platform that everyone would much rather use if they got to choose, Epic knows this and it's why all they can do is give bribes. It's not even why they're doing it if we can even believe anything they say at this point, they've said they're doing this because they want Steam to take less cuts from publishers/developers. Even if Valve caves in and gives a bigger cut to publishers/developers, we as customers won't benefit from it and we'd have to deal with this exclusive BS for years for no benefit of our own.

You?d think they?d actually use some of that capital to, you know, invest in developing a better platform vs merely buying up timed deals. So far it?s almost like they?ve been taking their cues from Xbox execs.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

You?d think they?d actually use some of that capital to, you know, invest in developing a better platform vs merely buying up timed deals. So far it?s almost like they?ve been taking their cues from Xbox execs.

And this is the issue. This is what competition looks like. And yeah, if they also bought up timed exclusives, it wouldn't be my favorite thing in the world... but it would be understood. There needs to be some edge.

This is a WoW vs MMO clone thing. No game could have the lore, the background, the install base, the content, etc compared to WoW. but they wanted that sweet, sweet Subscription money.

But Epic came out as an new MMO who just went and bought concepts for new monsters/player characters. "Oh, you wanted to be that Paladin/Elementalist Hybrid that a desginer was teasing in Blizzcon? Too bad. We bought that designer and all of his original designs. If you want to play said Character, you need to come to our game. Now, you can't buy too much... because if you do, we'll block you. And we we just got the idea of authentication, so bare with us on that."

People keep on using the term competition. Use it when it's appropriate. This isn't competition. Epic Game Store and Steam aren't even the same league in terms of customer service. When so many programmers coming out and saying that one of their first projects in learning how to code is to make a functioning shopping cart, it strikes me that Epic's focus isn't on making a good experience for the customers. Not anywhere near it.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

Are you saying that Epic's dealings right now are making them actual competition? Or are you saying that the concept of Epic games becoming actual competition is a good thing? That first sentence is what's throwing me off.

No to the first statement, yes to the second. As of right now, Epic are obviously setting themselves up to be the competition, but they've got neither the customer base, a good enough platform or enough games on the platform to be close. If they keep this up for a year and stick to the road map they've laid out, then I believe they might be strong enough to at least be labelled a potential competitor to Steam's monopoly.

 

[Worgen]

How exactly are we getting a better deal by having Epic bribing publishers to not put their games on steam? All they're doing is forcing people to buy games on a far inferior platform and that's it.

By establishing themselves as actual competition they will force Steam to increase customer satisfaction in order to retain sales that might otherwise end up with Epic. We are not quit there yet, as Epic is still in the phase were they must establish their claim of being a competitor (hence all the exclusive deals, to bring customers in), but give it a year or two at this rate and Steam will have to change or see their monopoly going to Epic. When Steam starts reacting, customers start winning.

I do wonder when they will establish themselves as actual competition, bribing publishers to not put their games on Steam for a X amount of time is not competing, this won't bring more concurrent users to their platform. Just how will they retain sales from customer satisfaction if Epic is literally just buying exclusive deals? It's not like people are going to start using the Epic launcher instead of Steam, Valve already has the vastly superior platform that everyone would much rather use if they got to choose, Epic knows this and it's why all they can do is give bribes. It's not even why they're doing it if we can even believe anything they say at this point, they've said they're doing this because they want Steam to take less cuts from publishers/developers. Even if Valve caves in and gives a bigger cut to publishers/developers, we as customers won't benefit from it and we'd have to deal with this exclusive BS for years for no benefit of our own.

You?d think they?d actually use some of that capital to, you know, invest in developing a better platform vs merely buying up timed deals. So far it?s almost like they?ve been taking their cues from Xbox execs.

Which is really weird considering that Microsoft has pretty much decided to bring most of its games to steam.

 

[sonofliber]

How exactly are we getting a better deal by having Epic bribing publishers to not put their games on steam? All they're doing is forcing people to buy games on a far inferior platform and that's it.

By establishing themselves as actual competition they will force Steam to increase customer satisfaction in order to retain sales that might otherwise end up with Epic. We are not quit there yet, as Epic is still in the phase were they must establish their claim of being a competitor (hence all the exclusive deals, to bring customers in), but give it a year or two at this rate and Steam will have to change or see their monopoly going to Epic. When Steam starts reacting, customers start winning.

I do wonder when they will establish themselves as actual competition, bribing publishers to not put their games on Steam for a X amount of time is not competing, this won't bring more concurrent users to their platform. Just how will they retain sales from customer satisfaction if Epic is literally just buying exclusive deals? It's not like people are going to start using the Epic launcher instead of Steam, Valve already has the vastly superior platform that everyone would much rather use if they got to choose, Epic knows this and it's why all they can do is give bribes. It's not even why they're doing it if we can even believe anything they say at this point, they've said they're doing this because they want Steam to take less cuts from publishers/developers. Even if Valve caves in and gives a bigger cut to publishers/developers, we as customers won't benefit from it and we'd have to deal with this exclusive BS for years for no benefit of our own.

You?d think they?d actually use some of that capital to, you know, invest in developing a better platform vs merely buying up timed deals. So far it?s almost like they?ve been taking their cues from Xbox execs.

Which is really weird considering that Microsoft has pretty much decided to bring most of its games to steam.

Because they?re now willing to acknowledge their own store has never been worthwhile, backed up by a dire lack of $ being spent there.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

People need to understand that the entire premise of Epic's store is to cater to devs and publishers, not to consumers. They're not even trying to hide that. I wouldn't have a problem with Epic if they truly wanted to compete with Steam and other stores. But their entire business model revolves around depriving consumers of choice and they're doing it by dangling money in front of devs and publishers. Epic wins, devs and publishers win, and gamers, once again, end up as suckers. We got sucked into all those forms of DLC and loot boxes and other sociopathic business models designed to suck you dry and deprive you of choice and other consumer rights. But yeah, go ahead, let it happen again. Buy from Epic because you have no impulse control and you just have to have the latest shiny new game.